Current Trial Russell Hill & Carol Clay Pt 2 *Pilot Greg Lynn Guilty for the Murder of Carol Clay

[Kurve]

Here is PART 1 Russell Hill & Carol Clay - Wonnangatta *Pilot Greg Lynn Pleads Not Guilty to Murder

DPP v Lynn [2024] VSCA 62 (12 April 2024) INTERLOCUTORY APPEAL​

R v Lynn (Rulings 1-4) [2024] VSC 373 (28 June 2024)​

R v Lynn (Rulings 5 & 6) [2024] VSC 375 (28 February 2024)

R v Lynn (Ruling 7) [2024] VSC 376 (8 May 2024)

The Greg Lynn Police Interview Tapes (Shortened Version)

The 3.5 HR Police Interview

THREADS FOR THE HIGH COUNTRY DISAPPEARED
High Country Disappearance of Prison Boss David Prideaux
The Disappearance of Warren Meyer

2008 - Warren Meyer (23 March 2008) not found
2010 - Japp and Annie Viergever (29 March 2010) both shot & 3 dogs, house burnt.
2011 - David Prideaux (5 June 2011) not found
2017 - Kevin Tenant (17 February 2018) shot 3 times, played dead.
2019 - Conrad Whitlock (29 July 2019) not found
2019 - Niels Becker (24 October 2019) not found
2020 - Russell Hill and Carol Clay (20 March 2020) murdered

Lynn's first wife Lisa, was found dead on 26 October 1999.

 

[Lady O]

For those who don't know the process here: there will be firstly a plea hearing (date yet, to be set) where the defence presents a plea and then the judge sentences after that.

So sentencing is some time away, possibly 2 months.

If there is an appeal then GL will run the risk of re-opening the case to being sentenced for two murders not just the one.

But, I thought you couldn't be tried twice for the same crime, without "compelling new evidence"?

 

[Lady O]

I was thinking the same thing.
Picturing palm tree 🏝

Or maybe he just 'disappeared' too?

 

[faible]

If they accepted that he lied about the order of events, surely they should see the whole story as a fabrication?

This isn't how the justice system works.

 

[Underarrest_]

Or maybe he just 'disappeared' too?

Has anyone seen him?

 

[Kurve]

Wrongs Act Victoria:

WRONGS ACT 1958 - SECT 43​

Definitions
In this Part—

"court" includes tribunal, and, in relation to a claim for damages, means anycourt or tribunal by or before which the claim falls to be determined;

"damages" includes any form of monetary compensation;

"harm" means harm of any kind and includes—


(a) injury or death; and


(b) damage to property; and


(c) economic loss

"injury" means personal or bodily injury and includes—


(a) pre-natal injury; and


(b) psychological or psychiatricinjury; and


(c) disease; and


(d) aggravation, acceleration orrecurrence of an injury or disease;

"negligence" means failure to exercise reasonable care.


The main factor in damages is economic loss. As RH was retired the reality is there isn't going to be much in the way of economic losses to recover in the case that a wrongful death can be proven against GL. Not withstanding the fact that a jury has declared GL not guilty of murder and that it will be difficult to prove that RH himself was not culpable in some way.

Of course anyone can lodge a claim if they like in the magistrates court. The reality could be huge legal fees, a small chance of a victory and putting the family through more publicity over something they probably just want to put behind them now.

There's a lot in there for Hill's family to potentially claim on actually.

 

[Zidane98]

Put it behind them now?
I don’t believe they’ll ever really do that.
I hope they at least get some compensation for what they’ve been through (post death,) which he has admitted too.

What happened post death isn't covered under the wrongs act. That wouldn't be a wrongful death claim. I'm not sure what the likelihood of winning that case would be as he will be punished for what he did post death under the interfering with human remains crime during sentencing.

 

[Poppy Penny]

12ft.io/https://www.smh.com.au/national/victoria/what-the-jury-wasn-t-told-about-the-missing-campers-case-20240616-p5jm68.html

Thanks so much! Link works.

 

[FrankGrimes]

The prosecution can’t appeal a not guilty verdict… not sure why people are saying they can.

 

[Kurve]

What happened post death isn't covered under the wrongs act. That wouldn't be a wrongful death claim. I'm not sure what the likelihood of winning that case would be as he will be punished for what he did post death under the interfering with human remains crime during sentencing.

Where does it claim post death behaviour's are not covered?

 

[The jouneyman]

I look forward to hearing the judges comments in sentencing.

Already done 3 years probably be out in 10 years

 

[Zidane98]

Thanks so much! Link works.

The prosecution allowing the Landcruiser to be returned to the family and on sold is pretty nuts.

 

[Terrafirma]

While it isn't necessary, juries feel safer if they can see a motive.

I never really understood that black and white decision made between the prosecution and the defence to remove the option for manslaughter.

Pretty simple in the sense the Judge said if you can't be sure on murder then you can't be sure on MS. They are if you liek one of the same. I would disagree with this because I believe the jury may have found Lynn guilty of MS re Hill but in the purity of the law that's how it works. Thank god the jury thought like most of us did within these threads if I can say that and at least found him guilty of 1 x murder. Appeals aside at least 1 x murder puts him behind bars for the rest of his life let's say 20-30 years? The sentencing will be interesting because that's where the judge comes in and we'll then find out what the judge really feels about the whole case, his actions afterwards etc etc

 

[Earls Smother]

This isn't how the justice system works.

They have found him guilty for CC based on accepting that he lied. He said CC was first, they didn't believe him. The second person is dead and had their body destroyed.

Why would he lie? Why would he destroy the evidence for both deaths? Not hard to see that his whole story was concocted to fit with what little evidence he left behind.

Lots of cases don't have direct evidence and the accused is found guilty.

 

[Terrafirma]

Already done 3 years probably be out in 10 years

I doubt that very much. are you saying he gets 13 years for cold blooded murder of Clay as a witness?

 

[Romaine Calm]

GUILTY of murdering Carol Clay

Makes sense imo.

Great news, could have been both but at least Greg will face the justice he deserves. Click, click boom Greg

 

[Terrafirma]

Put it behind them now?
I don’t believe they’ll ever really do that.
I hope they at least get some compensation for what they’ve been through (post death,) which he has admitted too.

As I understand it his house can be used to pay the victims compensation? His house was possessed and subject to a guilty verdict can be used for the above

 

[Zidane98]

I doubt that very much. are you saying he gets 13 years for cold blooded murder of Clay as a witness?

Sounds like a poll for the sentence length is needed...


I'm going with 25 years.

 

[Zidane98]

As I understand it his house can be used to pay the victims compensation? His house was possessed and subject to a guilty verdict can be used for the above

That is true but only available to CC family.

 

[Kurve]

Pretty simple in the sense the Judge said if you can't be sure on murder then you can't be sure on MS. They are if you liek one of the same. I would disagree with this because I believe the jury may have found Lynn guilty of MS re Hill but in the purity of the law that's how it works. Thank god the jury thought like most of us did within these threads if I can say that and at least found him guilty of 1 x murder. Appeals aside at least 1 x murder puts him behind bars for the rest of his life let's say 20-30 years? The sentencing will be interesting because that's where the judge comes in and we'll then find out what the judge really feels about the whole case, his actions afterwards etc etc

I want to see exactly what the judge said but which I'm sure included words to the effect of 'the prosecution and the defense have agreed' which left me with the impression it was a deal.

 

[Zidane98]

Why is that nuts? It wasn’t the accused’s vehicle, it belonged to someone who innocently died (by his own doing apparently, which as a separate discussion is very odd).

What do you propose the prosecution do with that $100k vehicle? Use it for one of their assumed identities in a sting? Lol

Really? They needed to track it down for further evidence gathering so it was a pretty big mistake. They're lucky that it wasn't thoroughly cleaned enough to remove DNA evidence of CC under the canopy. At the time the police thought the couple had died from misadventure.

 

[Terrafirma]

Pandora's box awaits:

What the jury wasn’t told about the missing campers case​

Eight hours of former pilot Greg Lynn’s police interview, 5000 secret recordings and details about his first wife’s death were excluded from his murder trial.

https://www.theage.com.au/national/...the-missing-campers-case-20240616-p5jm68.html (Paid Age Article)

This part of his life is a secret and we may never know the truth

 

[MC Bad Genius]

If anybody can access this article, please feel free to post the main points.

I signed up for a subscription just to read this article ha!

• "His high-profile defence barrister won an application from the trial judge to keep vast swaths of the police case from the jury ... Among the excluded evidence were thousands of secret recordings of Lynn, two days’ worth of his interview with police, details about the former pilot’s character and the views of his first wife’s family on her traumatic death."

The Police Investigation

• They originally thought they had gotten lost or run off together
• Covid-19 limited the investigation to make inquiries
• The lead investigator didn't get to the site until 8 months after they were "missing"
• It was only in mid-2020 that they suspected murder
• Hill's family sold his ute after Police returned it to them
• In 2022 (after testing it multiple times), they found blood splatter and tissue on the canopy of the ute that DNA matched with Carol Clay
• Back in June 2022, they ruled out the other 11 drivers that had gone through the number plate recognition cameras and were left with Lynn's 4WD
• When they asked him about his movements in the Wonnangatta Valley, he was told he was a "person of interest" and not a suspect
• They noticed the 4WD had been painted and Lynn said it was a lockdown activity he did with his kids
• They had 5,000 recordings of Lynn talking to family member or himself in the home and car (including the one when he and his wife were watching 60 minutes)
• They decided to arrest him because one of the secret recordings revealed that his wife was worried about being left alone with 3 kids and Lynn himself seemed depressed and possibly suicidal

Police Interview

• They kept him for 3 days and had over 9 hours of interview footage, but only 5 hours were shown to the jury
• Although his lawyer said he was truthful throughout, pre-trial revealed he refused to talk to Police for 2 days
• When he decided to talk, he said it was against his solicitor's advice and due to him wanting to get resolution
• He drew maps of the campsite and the location where the bodies were found
• During pre-trial, Lynn's lawyer suggested that they hadn't done a required mental health assessment and had undermined the legal process - apparently it got quite testy
• There was arguments in pre-trial about the PEACE method the Officers used (that has been criticised previously)
• His lawyer wanted the whole interview thrown out due to a) how long it took (and that it was an attack on his right to silence), and b) that having the interview room set to freezing was an unfair tactic

Lynn's First Wife, Lisa

• In pre-trial, the prosecutors floated calling her family to testify to Lynn's character and the nature of her death, reading out statements from her parents in the hearing
• Lisa's mother blamed Lynn for the death, saying it was a "combination of fear and torture she lived under"
• She also accused Lynn of ongoing physical and mental abuse
• She referenced the incident of killing a neighbour's pet and also recounted an incident where he verbally went off at someone at the pub and then turned it onto Lisa when they got home
• Lisa apparently kept a diary of when he was abusive and death threats that he had made towards her (and their children)
• The judge agreed that they were prejudicial and couldn't be included in the trial

There was also some more information from someone that had known him much earlier on, but it's a bit irrelevant.

 

[Kurve]

I'm pretty impressed with the jury coming back with two clear decisions actually but it might have been better for the Hill family if they'd hung on the decision for Hill.

 

[striker3]

Really? They needed to track it down for further evidence gathering so it was a pretty big mistake. They're lucky that it wasn't thoroughly cleaned enough to remove DNA evidence of CC under the canopy. At the time the police thought the couple had died from misadventure.

Yeh fair enough!

That shows me it was a botched prosecution where they were floundering for evidence to support their case.

 

[faible]

They have found him guilty for CC based on accepting that he lied. He said CC was first, they didn't believe him. The second person is dead and had their body destroyed.

Why would he lie? Why would he destroy the evidence for both deaths? Not hard to see that his whole story was concocted to fit with what little evidence he left behind.

Lots of cases don't have direct evidence and the accused is found guilty.

He'd lie if he killed Clay second, since that would be murder.

There's no evidence AFAIK to disprove that there was a struggle with Hill - and therefore that Hill could have died during a struggle - and manslaughter was not an option.

There was at least some evidence around the sequence of events that would have had to occur for Clay to be accidentally shot before Hill to suggest it was improbable.

If he was destroying evidence for one, why not both and try to get away with the whole thing? Given it seems he killed Clay to cover up killing Hill, or so the jury believes.

You're doing that thing where people forgot how the justice system works and base it on what 'seems' more likely, which is fine in a civil suit, but not a criminal one.